Ryders crash -motor?

[jens_attacks]

So how come we,ve never seen this before on any other rider's bike ? lots of downhill crashes to see.

yeh totally normal for the rear wheel of a bike to propel itself in a 360.

i agree with you sir.
i just watched the crash of john-lee augustyn on cime de la bonette in 2008 tdf. and what i see there? he stops sliding easily but just like by miracle(yeah right), his bike acts like being jet-propelled, going into the ravine. why it doesn't stop, i ask you now...very very weird

also watch the angle his legs make here in this photo. now correct if i'm wrong but this is known to be a masonic sign.
it's really bad guys, these should open our eyes

 

[jens_attacks]

No wonder moderators get poor press. Why aren't they stopping ridiculous threads like this instead of banning people for imagined transgressions.

you call it ridiculous now but when automatic bikes ridden by reptilians of the 7th moon will crash into you, you will see the truth.

 

[DominicDecoco]

Dude, like 2 people said they thought it was a motor.

Don't pin that on the clinic.

My bad. Especially given that The Clinic is normally such reasonable place..

 

[sniper]

seriously? They dont depend on each other. Its all about how the bike fall, its not common and sure its pretty ****ing random, but front wheel stopped when it hit ground but the rear wheel did not touch the ground before he tried catching it and off it went.

must be hard to see with blinders on, but guess what, the back wheel drags over the asphalt a couple of meters before the bike comes to a halt.

 

[sniper]

i agree with you sir.
i just watched the crash of john-lee augustyn on cime de la bonette in 2008 tdf. and what i see there? he stops sliding easily but just like by miracle(yeah right), his bike acts like being jet-propelled, going into the ravine. why it doesn't stop, i ask you now...very very weird

my point exactly: jetpropelled.
now look at ryders bike.
smooth and swift, gradual movement. poetry.
nothing jetpropelled.

 

[melkemugg]

Like explaining evolution to christian fundamentalists.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

must be hard to see with blinders on, but guess what, the back wheel drags over the asphalt a couple of meters before the bike comes to a halt.

you and your people have their blinders on ...i think you have the cheating blinders on.

 

[The Hitch]

seriously? They dont depend on each other. Its all about how the bike fall, its not common and sure its pretty ****ing random, but front wheel stopped when it hit ground but the rear wheel did not touch the ground before he tried catching it and off it went.

This.

10 characters.

 

[The Hitch]

Like explaining evolution to christian fundamentalists.

We have a thread for that too.

 

[kingjr]

This.

10 characters.

 

[sniper]

Like explaining evolution to christian fundamentalists.

you and your people have their blinders on ...i think you have the cheating blinders on.

ladies, stop niggling.
just trying to explain what we see there.
the rear wheel hit the asphalt just as early as (or even earlier than) the front wheel, yet the front wheel stops spinning, rear wheel doesn;t.
secondly, if it where natural spin, it would not cause the bike to move as gradually/smoothly as it did. (imo of course, could be wrong)
motorized rearwheel is but one of several possible explanations.
but at least it's an explanation.
now let me hear yours. (or not)

 

[melkemugg]

ladies, stop niggling.
just trying to explain what we see there.
the rear wheel hit the asphalt just as early as (or even earlier than) the front wheel, yet the front wheel stops spinning, rear wheel doesn;t.
secondly, if it where natural spin, it would not cause the bike to move as gradually/smoothly as it did. (imo of course, could be wrong)
motorized rearwheel is but one of several possible explanations.
but at least it's an explanation.
now let me hear yours. (or not)

Smooth bike and smooth asphalt (and even a smooth rider) equals smooth movements. Yes you are right, it touches the ground but i guess it just kind of nibs the surface while the front wheel actual seemed to be stopped by the break (hard to see) and when he lets the shoe go there is nothing that holds the bike back anymore and it starts spinning on the ground. It also looks like its spinning and gliding more on the wheel than on any rubber from the tyre.

But i guess having an engine running while breaking down hard in a sharp turn going downhill is more logical.

 

[GJB123]

you and your people have their blinders on ...i think you have the cheating blinders on.

What off course helps is that this is a Garmin-rider so you could be sure of sniper's Pavlovian reaction and getting his 2 cents in when cycling's anti-christ JV is involved. Nothing new there.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

ladies, stop niggling.
just trying to explain what we see there.
the rear wheel hit the asphalt just as early as (or even earlier than) the front wheel, yet the front wheel stops spinning, rear wheel doesn;t.
secondly, if it where natural spin, it would not cause the bike to move as gradually/smoothly as it did. (imo of course, could be wrong)
motorized rearwheel is but one of several possible explanations.
but at least it's an explanation.
now let me hear yours. (or not)

 

[Granville57]

Given the way the bikes moves would he not have needed to put the bike in reverse for a motorised bike to spin that way? I'm no physicist though...

Well that might explain him losing control of his bike the way he did then, no?

 

[sniper]

Smooth bike and smooth asphalt (and even a smooth rider) equals smooth movements. Yes you are right, it touches the ground but i guess it just kind of nibs the surface while the front wheel actual seemed to be stopped by the break (hard to see) and when he lets the shoe go there is nothing that holds the bike back anymore and it starts spinning on the ground. It also looks like its spinning and gliding more on the wheel than on any rubber from the tyre.

fair of course.

But i guess having an engine running while breaking down hard in a sharp turn going downhill is more logical.

cheating takes all kinds of shapes in cycling and prosport.
motorized bikes would not surprise me the least.
some invisible bloke creating the world in 7 days is a different story.

 

[Granville57]

I am no physicist and have no idea about these things, but it does look odd, or am I being clinic cycnic?

By no means. In just one post you've become a Clinic hero.

And I thank you for this thread.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

By no means. In just one post you've become a Clinic hero.

And I thank you for this thread.

(You appear to have assigned that quote to the wrong person)

 

[Granville57]

(You appear to have assigned that quote to the wrong person)

Totally bizarre. There are definitely unseen forces at work here.

 

[Granville57]

gravity could be an explanation but it doesn't look at all steep enough.

And if gravity were to blame (or to thank, depending on one's perspective) why wouldn't the bike continue sliding DOWN? Instead, the bike clearly circles back UP on its own, like a boomerang returning to the hand that cast it.

 

[Benotti69]

These Cervelo's dont like cornering do they and they appear to go down where no other bike goes down. I am thinking Dan Martin final corner LBL and Hesjedal the other day. A dry day, didn't see any oil and boom down they go.

Anyone seen any x-rays the UCI are supposed to be doing of winners bikes? Do they post the x-rays online?

 

[Granville57]

Do they post the x-rays online?

 

[hrotha]

As always, the conspiracy theorists, the very people who pride themselves in not simply buying what the official sources tell them, are the most gullible of the bunch and will accept uncritically whatever comes from non-mainstream sources.

 

[Granville57]

As always, the conspiracy theorists, the very people who pride themselves in not simply buying what the official sources tell them,...

What are the official sources saying about this matter?

 

[Almeisan]

If it spins, take a drink. If it doesn't spin, take a drink.

WTF comment.